 |
Dear Internet,
"Tales
from Earthsea," the movie, comes from that famed Studio Ghibli which seems
to be a gold mine when it comes to animated films. If you want to read all about the various
acclaimed film that have come from them, you are either welcome to go through
your archives, Internet, or come out of that rock you crawled under. A good number of them are well made with all
the intricacies that adults seek in their movies and lightheartedness that kids
want. I like Ghibli movies, I do. What I find myself enjoying less and less are
Hayao Miyazaki films. It is not to say
that his movies are not good or worth watching, but try to watch anything he
has done since "Spirited Away" and try not to feel that you are being
forced fed an environmental awareness film.
Even the films before that are heavy with this theme to the point where
every Miyazaki film is the same three or four subject matters with only a few differences
like setting and characters. You could
even strike off characters once you realize nearly every Miyazaki heroine is
just the same character at different ages.
Why do I mention all of this when "Tales from Earthsea" was
directed by his son Goro Miyazaki? It is
because every time I find a Studio Ghiblie film that has little to no influence
from Hayao has become some of my favorite films. From "My Neighbors the Yamadas" to "Grave
of the Fireflies" to "Only Yesterday" to "The Cat Returns,"
all these non-Hayao films have a wide range of topics and are some of my
favorite animated films. "Whisper
of the Heart" was only written by Hayao Miyazaki, not directed, but it is
a film that I regard to be one of the best films I have ever seen. So when I knew that "Tales from
Earthsea" had next to no influence from him, I was hoping that it would
become a personal favorite.
The
story is set in a different world called Earthsea. There are wizards, dragons, and similar to the
medieval age with swords and kings ruling man.
Enter Prince Arran, who kills his father in the first seven minutes, takes
his sword, and runs away. Why does he do
this? The movie never quite says. Later on, we meet Sparrowhawk, a highly
skilled wizard out on a journey to determine what is causing the imbalance in
the land. The imbalance is present in the
failing crops and livestock among other things.
What exactly is he looking for? I
do not think the film quite makes this clear.
I say think because it is even asked to one character what is
Sparrowhawk looking for, but the character has no answer. While it is understood that he is looking for
a general reason for the imbalance, the movie makes an implication that it is
Cob, the villain, causing the problems, but Sparrowhawk does not acknowledge
this. At the same time, the film tries
to showcase a number of different reasons.
In the one city featured, there is slavery and hazia, a strong addictive
drug that could be compared to heroin. It
can stand to reason that the people of the land are bringing about their own downfall
by destroying themselves from within.
The whole imbalance aspect of the story is placed on the back burner for
the rest of the film. It could mean that
the falling world is merely the setting that the story is set in, but it is
presented as the original problem for the story. If it is supposed to be the central plot
point, then it fails because there is no true resolution to what caused the
imbalance.
There
is the wizard Cob, who might be the cause, but the movie does a poor job of
showing why. He does seek out a way to live
eternally, which could be reasoned as force that could cause the balance to
tip, but the film does not show a direct correspondence of his actions to the
rest of the world. There is the fact
that he leads a group of slave catchers, but the reason he needs slaves is not
even hinted at. One can deduce that if
he trying to extend his life, he might be using the slaves as test subjects for
his research. Then again he might be
selling them off to fund his research.
The film is not very clear about that.
There seems to be a number of things the film is fuzzy about.
The
film spends a large amount of time going through the various arguments for the preciousness
of life and its relationship with death.
This I do not mind nor do I wish for it to sound like I am marking it
against the film. The main character,
Arran, is the focus of these musings.
Sometimes he commits himself to live and other times he resigns himself
to die. It is a bit wishy washy for him
to be willing to die at the hands of wolves in one scene but try to save the
life of a random girl in another while also placing her life as minor whilst
doing so. There are inconsistencies in
his words, but that might be the point. Arran
does not understand the value of life and death and the paradox thereof. I am reminded of Chesterton saying, "A
soldier, surrounded by enemies, if he is to cut his way out, needs to combine a
strong desire for living with a strange carelessness about dying." ("Othodoxy") The movie does a good job of portraying this
by the end, but what an ending.
The
ending is probably one of the most desu ex machina contrived finishers I have
seen recently. It was not even
needed. It was not as if the story had
painted itself into a corner and needed a way out. Instead, the movie creates a problem within a
three minute interval and pulls one of the worst plot twists out of nowhere. Do you want to know how bad it is,
Internet? The heroine gets choked to
death, does not die, and instead turns into a dragon. If you watch the Japanese audio version with
subtitles, like I did, then you will be left as to how in the world that
happened. There is no foreshadowing at
all or even an explanation for it. On
top of that everyone is pretty much alright with her being able to turn into a
dragon. I was completely lost as to what
had happened until I decided to watch the opening again, but his time in
English. Apparently, if you choose
freedom you can be a dragon. If you
choose possessions you become a human.
Does that mean that all dragons are immortal? No, because one died in the first five
minutes of the film. It is only this one
random girl who is also given eternal life.
Maybe the English version gives a better explanation as to why she was
special, but I am not going to watch the whole thing again just yet. This is not the first time that I have
watched a Studio Ghibli film where the English translation dub makes more sense
than the Japanese subtitles. Perhaps it
is because the English dubbers recognize the plot holes and try and fill them
with localization. I cannot say for
certain. Then again, the source material
might have explained more, but from what I gather, this movie derailed greatly
from the book it was based on.
It is a
shame that the film had such a complete jumble of an ending. The rest of the movie is filled with great
background and scenery. The first time
that the city of Hort Town appeared, it took my breath away. The intricacies present show a high level of
detail. The scenes are filled with
lively characters and a large amount of objects interacting with one
another. The music does a good job in
carrying the moods of the scenes. The
world created had a lot to offer, and it was apparent that it was part of a
larger story. Quiet little scenes are
bountiful but they do not detract in my opinion. Instead they create a warm gentle atmosphere
where they are most needed.
"Tales
from Earthsea" had a lot to live up to.
It was the first feature film that Goro Miyazaki directed. It had the Ghibli name backing it. It was the first film to be based on the
"Earthsea" novels. Overall, it
was average mostly because of the terrible twist ending. The reason I do not mark it as a bad film is
because it creates an intriguing world.
The reason I do not mark it higher is because it does not do much with
this created world. The climax is thrown
out the window and the exposition seems to hint at a bigger picture not talked
about. "Earthsea" is stuck in
that middle ground. It can be enjoyed as
a tale of redemption for Arran, but he never really redeems the act that
started off the whole movie. Instead he
redeems his shortcomings, which are never really explained how they occur.
Yours in digital,
BeepBoop
P.S. Next will be "Throne of Blood" (1957).
No comments:
Post a Comment